Skip to main content
Photography

Return to Question

deleted 867 characters in body
Source Link
i336_
i336_
  • 317
  • 2
  • 6

Question updated (see old version) - this introduction was initially much vaguer, as I was at a bit of a loss for how to introduce this. Apologies for not simply providing appropriate detail from the get-go./clarified

 

Something has inundated a friend's home and is randomly attacking all who enter with unusual, uncomfortable bites that produce a drawing/aching sensation. I can corroborate my friend's experience that the source of the bites cannot be seen with the naked eye. My friend suspects an infestation with a smaller type of I'm looking to perform feature identification on small tick or mite which may be around/bug/mite-like creatures approximately 0.3mm to 1mm in size.

While my friend works on capturing/sending off samples of something that's effectively invisible I'd prefer to be able to project magnified images onto an external screen, as I want topersonally find out howlooking through magnification lenses and/or holding one eye shut to raise the chances of their successbe an annoying strain (and minimize distress caused by doubtI think my eyes don't focus well) by first performing successful first-pass identification at home.

So,Working with a budget of $150-$200 (closer to $150 if possible), I'm primarily looking to magnify sub-millimeter sized tick-like objects suchfor a solution that features/structure/species can be positively identified. The magnification only needs to beis "good enough" for positive identification - I'm hoping the testing laboratories my friend will be sending samples off to willhelp sort and filter samples, although higher resolution would be able to release evidence-quality imagesawesome.

I personally find closing one eyeWith no experience with photography, I'm not sure how best to go about this, and looking through an eyepiece/lenswould appreciate a bit of a strain (not sure why), so I'd very much like to project the images onto an external screenadvice.

 

I've done a bit of research and found some interesting-looking options, but with no real working knowledge of photography, I am way out of my depth in terms of concretely deciding exactly how I should proceed.

I'm hoping to identify a solution that will punch a little above its weight for around the $150-$200 mark.

Question updated (see old version) - this introduction was initially much vaguer, as I was at a bit of a loss for how to introduce this. Apologies for not simply providing appropriate detail from the get-go.

 

Something has inundated a friend's home and is randomly attacking all who enter with unusual, uncomfortable bites that produce a drawing/aching sensation. I can corroborate my friend's experience that the source of the bites cannot be seen with the naked eye. My friend suspects an infestation with a smaller type of tick or mite which may be around 0.3mm to 1mm in size.

While my friend works on capturing/sending off samples of something that's effectively invisible, I want to find out how to raise the chances of their success (and minimize distress caused by doubt) by first performing successful first-pass identification at home.

So, with a budget of $150-$200, I'm looking to magnify sub-millimeter sized tick-like objects such that features/structure/species can be positively identified. The magnification only needs to be "good enough" for positive identification - I'm hoping the testing laboratories my friend will be sending samples off to will be able to release evidence-quality images.

I personally find closing one eye and looking through an eyepiece/lens a bit of a strain (not sure why), so I'd very much like to project the images onto an external screen

 

I've done a bit of research and found some interesting-looking options, but with no real working knowledge of photography, I am way out of my depth in terms of concretely deciding exactly how I should proceed.

I'm hoping to identify a solution that will punch a little above its weight for around the $150-$200 mark.

Question updated/clarified

I'm looking to perform feature identification on small tick/bug/mite-like creatures approximately 0.3mm to 1mm in size. I'd prefer to be able to project magnified images onto an external screen, as I personally find looking through magnification lenses and/or holding one eye shut to be an annoying strain (I think my eyes don't focus well).

Working with a budget of $150-$200 (closer to $150 if possible), I'm primarily looking for a solution that is "good enough" to help sort and filter samples, although higher resolution would be awesome.

With no experience with photography, I'm not sure how best to go about this, and would appreciate a bit of advice.

I've done a bit of research and found some interesting-looking options, but with no real working knowledge of photography, I am way out of my depth in terms of concretely deciding exactly how I should proceed.

added 1027 characters in body
Source Link
i336_
i336_
  • 317
  • 2
  • 6

I'm tryingQuestion updated (see old version) - this introduction was initially much vaguer, as I was at a bit of a loss for how to surpriseintroduce this. Apologies for not simply providing appropriate detail from the get-go.

Something has inundated a friendfriend's home and is randomly attacking all who enter with a magnification setupunusual, uncomfortable bites that will clearly resolve millimeter-sized details ontoproduce a screen so theydrawing/aching sensation. I can corroborate my friend's experience that the source of the bites cannot be clearly seen with the naked eye. This person is doing fairly precise work while doing their best to squint at details throughMy friend suspects an infestation with a tiny handheld magnification lens that is most definitely not upsmaller type of tick or mite which may be around 0.3mm to 1mm in size.

While my friend works on capturing/sending off samples of something that's effectively invisible, I want to find out how to raise the taskchances of their success (and minimize distress caused by doubt) by first performing successful first-pass identification at home. An external screen is

So, with a strong preferencebudget of $150-$200, as itI'm looking to magnify sub-millimeter sized tick-like objects such that features/structure/species can be positively identified. The magnification only needs to be "good enough" for positive identification - I'm hoping the testing laboratories my friend will eliminate eyestrain from constant superbe sending samples off to will be able to release evidence-focusingquality images.

I personally find closing one eye and looking through an eyepiece/lens a bit of a strain (not sure why), so I'd very much like to project the images onto an external screen

I'm trying to surprise a friend with a magnification setup that will clearly resolve millimeter-sized details onto a screen so they can be clearly seen. This person is doing fairly precise work while doing their best to squint at details through a tiny handheld magnification lens that is most definitely not up to the task. An external screen is a strong preference, as it will eliminate eyestrain from constant super-focusing.

Question updated (see old version) - this introduction was initially much vaguer, as I was at a bit of a loss for how to introduce this. Apologies for not simply providing appropriate detail from the get-go.

Something has inundated a friend's home and is randomly attacking all who enter with unusual, uncomfortable bites that produce a drawing/aching sensation. I can corroborate my friend's experience that the source of the bites cannot be seen with the naked eye. My friend suspects an infestation with a smaller type of tick or mite which may be around 0.3mm to 1mm in size.

While my friend works on capturing/sending off samples of something that's effectively invisible, I want to find out how to raise the chances of their success (and minimize distress caused by doubt) by first performing successful first-pass identification at home.

So, with a budget of $150-$200, I'm looking to magnify sub-millimeter sized tick-like objects such that features/structure/species can be positively identified. The magnification only needs to be "good enough" for positive identification - I'm hoping the testing laboratories my friend will be sending samples off to will be able to release evidence-quality images.

I personally find closing one eye and looking through an eyepiece/lens a bit of a strain (not sure why), so I'd very much like to project the images onto an external screen

Became Hot Network Question
Tweeted twitter.com/StackPhotos/status/1295827835408482306
Source Link
i336_
i336_
  • 317
  • 2
  • 6

How can I magnify ≤1mm objects onto a display for under $200?

I'm trying to surprise a friend with a magnification setup that will clearly resolve millimeter-sized details onto a screen so they can be clearly seen. This person is doing fairly precise work while doing their best to squint at details through a tiny handheld magnification lens that is most definitely not up to the task. An external screen is a strong preference, as it will eliminate eyestrain from constant super-focusing.

I've done a bit of research and found some interesting-looking options, but with no real working knowledge of photography, I am way out of my depth in terms of concretely deciding exactly how I should proceed.

I'm hoping to identify a solution that will punch a little above its weight for around the $150-$200 mark.

I feel the macro-photography element of my question brings it at least minimally within scope for this forum, but I would welcome being redirected to a more on-topic environment if here is inappropriate.

Microscope?

Not really knowing where to start, I started by looking for microscopes. I found some basic-but-passable-looking options floating around on eBay like this one:

                 microscope

This particular one cites "40X-1000X" zoom, starts at around the US$100-US$150 mark, and includes a USB camera.

A microscope isn't what I'm looking for though. Worrying about reusing/preserving/breaking slides, whether oil solution is needed, etc etc is completely the wrong type of solution for my scenario.

So when my search for microscopes turned up video inspection cameras, I saw a much more promising option.

Inspection cameras

HDMI microscope camera

This thing is cool.

It outputs up to 4K@60fps over either Gigabit Ethernet or HDMI, and when using the HDMI mode, you can directly attach a mouse and use the builtin Linux-based UI to measure distances/angles/shapes, adjust settings, and store photos/videos onto USB flash storage.

At US$400-$700, this kind of thing is firmly out of my price range. :D

(Hunting around on Aliexpress will find example videos of these cameras in use. Some also show photos of what's displayed on the screen. It's very obviously Linux-based.)

Affordable inspection cameras

After blindly wandering around for a little while, I stumbled on this bit of interestingness at the other end of the spectrum:

VGA+USB camera

With a maximum output resolution of 1920x1080 (2073600 pixels), it actually kind of makes sense that this only has a 2MP sensor in it, given that it is expected to be used with a zoom lens. (Of course a scaled-down high(er)-resolution image would be sharper, but still.)

In a sea of $60-$100 offerings (including for cameras that looked exactly like the one above) I kind of did a double take when I saw this particular camera listed for US$15 (on eBay!). I have no idea what you get for that kind of price; I'll update this question when whatever I've ordered gets here. :D

It may well not be up to the task, and I might look for for something a tad better. But 2MP is already an improvement on the 640x480 (!) camera supplied with the microscope above...

Lenses

With the camera (potentially) out of the way, lens are where things get a bit, um...

ALL the lenses

...ambiguous, is maybe the right word?

It seems that inspection-type cameras all use a 25.4mm C mount. Unfortunately, there are a dizzying amount of C mount zoom lenses of different magnifications available - and none of the item listings provide objective references of what kind of magnification can be achieved. :(

This 180X lens pops up in a lot of offerings:

                  enter image description here

I've found listings for "360X" lenses that combine the above with a 2X objective lens.

        enter image description here

I even found someone supplying these units with a 2X objective lenses and some other kind of 2X lens, creating a 720X configuration.

But after quite a bit of back and forth between eBay and Aliexpress, I found this "500X" zoom lens:

                enter image description here

Please forgive my complete lack of domain-specific terminology here, but it seems to be based on a lower half that provides 0.7X-5.0X zoom, and an upper half that only ever seems to be available in 1X.

Of particular note is that the lower half on this "500X" lens goes from 0.7X to 5.0X; almost every other "large" zoom lens option (180X, 360X, 300X, 600X) on eBay/Aliexpress seems to use a lower half that spans 0.7X-4.5X, with the upper halves and objectives varied to produce various other magnification levels.

I think I can find the upper half of this "500X" lens separately (eg, top left in the montage image), but not the lower half. I'm not sure why.

I'm also extremely curious why the 1X lens used in this 500X camera is so much shorter than the 1X lens used in the 600X option above. (Both 1X lenses can be seen discretely on the far left of the montage.)

I've found a few "1000X" listings that supply the above "500X" lens with a 2X objective, and quote a visual field of around 1mm-5mm (which sounds like exactly the level of detail resolution I'm looking for). These tend to list on Aliexpress for around $120 (without shipping).

I'm happy to accept that price point... if it's an ideal approach.

At $15, I'll be able to empirically find out if the VGA/USB camera noted above is suitable/adequate once it gets here. (It's a 2MP C-mount webcam that can simultaneously output to USB and VGA (neat!). It'll be hard not to find something interesting for it to do unless it's absolutely terrible.)

But I can't quite be as iterative with a ~$120 (+ shipping) lens. So, my question is, are lenses like this "500X" item (with a 2X objective) a good idea?

I don't really expect I'm getting a "1000X" lens (I've been putting all the zoom levels in quotes...), mostly because I don't quite believe it's possible to buy 1000X magnification for $120. Ideally, I've made an invalid and cynical assumption.

But I did find this Aliexpress review for a 600X lens built using a 4.5X lower half, 1X upper half, and 2X objective (kudos to the remarkable translation from Russian):

feedback for aliexpress item ID 33001173563

No photo was included with the feedback, and I have no way to find out more. But reading this made me realize: maybe all the zoom ratings are the maximum possible achievable using a zooming camera also dialed all the way up? That's very, very technically correct :/

TL;DR: is there a better entry-level way to get 1-2 millimeters to fill a screen for ≈$150?